Talking Point:There are people who ask: Why cannot GBC organise a discussion programme every week, when this was a reality in the days when GBC had fewer resources and staff?

It is a valid question, to which one can ask: And when was the last time that you saw a minister taking part in a discussion programme?

Elected members, and ministers in particular, are directly responsible to the electorate and hence they should be seen taking part in discussion programmes etc, because the public is entitled to expect it and because they have the duty to do so.

There are scores of topical questions that can be featured every week, and it is not valid to suggest that if a minister refuses to go on a discussion that the Opposition member should then be barred from taking part.

Where to is GBC taking their responsibilities?

Both ministers and the relevant member of the Opposition should be invited to take part in discussions. If any decide they do not want to, that is their prerogative.

But it is not for GBC to preempt what might happen, far less to determine who is barred because a minister may not wish to attend.

What a crazy way to handle such an important matter.

Is this the policy of the rotating manager of GBC, who may have gone dizzy with so many rotations? Or the GBC Board? Or who is it that makes such odd decisions?

And it is an insult to the viewers and the public at large that one of the 'goodies' on offer when the so-called 'new' GBC is born is having political discussions! Is this going forward or backwards?!

Is GBC in such a bad state, people will ask. Surely the public does not have to wait until kingdom come to have a discussion programme at least once a week.

If such programmes were organised in the past, why cannot they be organised at present?

And what about the moribund GBC Board - do they exist?

Do they take an interest? Are they just there to fill a vacuum required by law to have a GBC board, and then they fall asleep.

And worse.

We have just witnessed the spectacle of the Chief Minister saying that the Government had proposed to GBC to employ Allan King, the presuymably 'independent' person who produced the report on broadcasting.

We are assured that the Government was just making a 'proposal'.

Well, what has the GBC BOard done? They have decided to take that course of action - seeking to employ the man 'proposed' by the Government! What kind of a proposal is that?

So, who is in charge of GBC? The GBC Board. The rotating managers, or the Government?

The least the GBC Board should have done is to have advertised the post for Chief Executive Office to see what response there would have been. It could have been that King may have turned out to be the best choice, well and good, but at least there would have been an attempt to do things properly.